(derekbaker)

Simple spreadsheet analysis. And implications for the fall elections.

Almost two years ago, I made my first minor blog splash (meaming, people linked to me; sad what constitutes fame these days, isn't it?) because of some number crunching I did that demonstrated how the ten states that supported Bush the most (or the 11 states that amended their constitutions that year to ban gay marriage) had higher divorce rates and teeenage pregnancy rates than the 10 states that supported Kerry the most strongly.

I decided to take another crack at the Excel spreadsheets in advance of the mid-term elections. This time, I was wondering how states with congressional delegations leaning Republican fared in terms of per capita income to states that leaned Democratic. There's no cause and effect here. But it seemed worth noting, if only to look at how more prosperous people vote versus the way those with less financial skill vote.

Source for per capita personal income: Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Dept of Commerce, 2005 estimates

The four states with 100 percent Republican congressional delegations (New Hampshire, Wyoming, Alaska, and Idaho) average $34,739 per person in income. The four states with 100 percent Democratic congressional delegations (Massachusetts, Hawaii, Vermont, and North Dakota) average only slightly higher: $35,887 per person. Only a $1,000 a year difference, give or take.

By the way, I put Vermont's independents in the Democratic camp (since they almost never vote with the Republicans). Elsewhere in this figuring, I give New Jersey's empty House seat to the Democrats (because that's where it came from) and the empty Texas seat (DeLay's) to the Republicans.

When we look at the top 10 for each, the spread gets wider: the average for the top 10 Republican Congressional states (the earlier four 100 percenters, plus Kentucky, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Arizona, and Utah) average $32,158 per person in income. The top 10 Democratic-delegation states (the four 100 percenters, plus Arkansas, West Virginia, Maryland, Rhode Island, Washington, and Oregon) averaged $34,306 per person.

However, the spread really becomes apparent when we look at all the states for whom the Republicans have a plurality, versus those states for whom the Democrats do.

Of the 30 states who have more Republican members of their congressional delegation than Democrats, the per capita income is $31,763. Of the 18 states with predominantly Democratic delegations, the per capita income is $36,142. And, as we would start to suspect at this point, the two states with evenly split delegations (Minnesota and Maine), have an average per capita income roughly in the middle: $34,312.50.

To look at it another way, the 10 states with the highest per capita income have 10 percent more Democrats than Republican in Congress, whereas the 10 states at the bottom of the income ladder have 30 percent more Republicans than Democrats in office in Congress.

If we split the Union in two, the 25 states with more per capita income gave Democrats a bare 1.4 percent advantage. The bottom 25 states gave Republicans a 21.2 percent advantage.

Again, there's no cause and effect here, it's just interesting to see how the more successful people -- if we measure success only by income, which is probably the worst measure possible -- are more likely to vote Democratic, whereas the less successful people -- again, speaking only economically -- will vote Republican.

Or, in other words, it's the time-worn saying all over again: If you want to live like a Republican, vote Democratic.

Labels: politics

---